Life Begins At Conception?

[Oik]

The answer is Yes. Just read all the previous posts.

[ironmonk]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='Sep 3 2004, 10:53 PM'] also, i don't think he should get phishy just for asking questions (assuming that's why he's phishy now)

but that's just IMHO [/quote]
I believe he got "phishy" for totally denying that the Catholic Church is right on anything it teaches and rejecting the Church on one of his blogs.

I posted the "why don't you look it up" because of the way he posted it instead of looking for the sources that it mentions... That, along with his attack on the Church in the [url="http://progressio.blogspot.com"]blog[/url] of his, and posts on [url="http://www.cta-usa.org/board/phpBB2/"]http://www.cta-usa.org/board/phpBB2/[/url] is the reason why I replied the way I did.

Also, I posted the way I did because he use to be one that looked things up... It boggles my mind why he would take it at face value.

One would think that anyone on this board that has intelligence like nate does would have learned to double check every attack on the Church teachings before posting it. If it was someone new to the board, I would have posted softer.

Nate is smarter than that... for him to carelessly post untruths without checking something that is so easy to check, calls suspicion to the thread.

God Bless,
ironmonk

Edited September 4, 2004 by ironmonk

[Aloysius]

i don't know where his blog is anymore, last time i knew he stopped blogging on the advice of a spiritual director so I was less informed of his motivations, i thought he might have just seen these and come here to ask questions

anyway, i think it's fine for someone to hear an argument against the faith and then post it here to see how Phatmassers refute it. that's what I thought Nathan was doing here.

i know a whole bunch as well, but that doesn't mean i've stopped feeling comfortable asking questions about opposing arguments so that everyone at PhatMass can take a shot at refuting it. if his intention was truly to do the research here about it, then i have no problem with that. the collective work of PhatMassers should be considered a resource where one can do research

but again, i was unaware of Nathan's current views

[JP2Iloveyou]

[quote name='i_feel_like_im_taking_crzy_pills' date='Sep 3 2004, 12:01 PM'] Personally, I do think that life begins at conception, but hey, that's just me... [/quote]
don't say that's just you. When something is true, it's true for everyone, not just you. Two pllus two is four for you and for me. Life begins at conception because it CAN'T begin anywhere else, unless you're going to say that cells that aren't alive grow and reproduce themselves and use energy. Nothing against you personally, I'm just giving a friendly tip when debating. Don't state your position as mere opinion. It weakens your position. Establish it as a fact and force your opponent to prove otherwise.

[MC Just]

I am banned from that site now. lol I will not tolerate Jezebel.

[Good Friday]

[quote name='ironmonk']Maybe, since you do not believe the Catholic Church is right in anything now, are you trying to cast doubt in the minds of faithful Catholics?[/quote]
God, I was asking a question. You people need less caffeine in your diet. Surely you know me well enough by now to know that if I had wanted to advance the pro-choice position, I [b]would have[/b] advanced the pro-choice position -- I'm not into subtlety.

I asked a question. Thank you for your answers. I think I'll ask fewer questions if personal attacks are [b]always[/b] going to be the response.

[Guest JeffCR07]

GoodFriday, while I have not responded to this particular thread, I will make a concerted effort to remain as charitable as possible in all conversations, you are entirely correct to note that personal attacks need not follow every discussion.

- Your Brother In Christ, Jeff

[Aloysius]

GF, you should post questions like this in the Apologetics section if the positions your posting are not those that you agree with or want to argue on behalf of

if you're looking for our response to a pro-choice argument, or to a protestant argument, or to any argument that you are not defending, post the question in Apologetics.

Pax

[StColette]

I agree with Al The Apologetics Phorum always has peeps willing to answer questions

[Good Friday]

[quote name='Aloysius']GF, you should post questions like this in the Apologetics section if the positions your posting are not those that you agree with or want to argue on behalf of[/quote]
No problem. I've actually not been in the apologetics section, and I thought it was only for Catholics to post resources for Catholic apologetics -- I didn't know questions were answered there, as well.

If I have any other questions, I'll post there, sorry!

[Paladin D]

[b]Ironmonk[/b], cool off with the personal attacks.

[ironmonk]

[quote name='Good Friday' date='Sep 3 2004, 01:22 PM'] Although I've put this in the Debate Table, I don't intend it for debate . . . it's really more of a question.

Does the church or does it not definitively teach that life begins at conception? I've always thought that it did, but now I'm not so sure. It appears that life beginning at conception has only been taught since 1869, so I would like someone to explain to me why . . .

1. In the fifth century, St. Augustine taught that the penance for abortion was that of sexual sin and not murder (St. Augustine, [i]De nuptiis et concupiscentia[/i])?

2. The Irish Canons placed the penalty of abortion at 3 1/2 years and the penalty for illicit sex at seven years (John T. McNeill and Helena M. Gamer, [i]Medieval Handbooks of Penance[/i], pgs. 119-120)?

3. In 1140 Gratian's code of canon law taught that "abortion was homicide only when the fetus was formed" -- which is not at conception (John T. Noonan, ed., [i]The Morality of Abortion: Legal and Historical Perspectives[/i], pg. 20)?

4. The Council of Vienne confirmed St. Thomas Aquinas' teaching that hominization (the point at which an unborn becomes a human person) is delayed and is not at conception (Joseph F. Dunceel, S.J., "Immediate Animation and Delayed Hominization," [i]Theological Studies[/i], vols. 1 & 2, pgs. 86-88)?

5. Pope Sixtus V, in his bull [i]Effraenatam[/i], was the first to apply the penalty for homicide, excommunication, to abortion in 1588 ([i]Codicis iuris fontes[/i], ed. P. Gasparri, vol. 1, pg. 308)?

6. Pope Gregory XIV overturned that penalty in [i]Sedes Apostolica[/i], which advised church officials, "where no homicide or no animated fetus is involved, not to punish more strictly than the sacred canons or civil legislation does" and why this pronouncement lasted until 1869 (Ibid., pgs. 330-331)?

7. The first implicit endorsement of immediate hominization came from Pope Pius IX in 1869 in [i]Apostolicae Sedis[/i] when he reinstated the excommunication penalty? [/quote]
The Catholic Church's teaching on abortion has remained the same for 2,000 years.

The oldest catechism of the church, the Didache, written about 90 A.D., declares "You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish.''

Ref: [url="http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0714.htm"]http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0714.htm[/url]

The Second Vatican Council and most recent Catechism of the Catholic Church states the same teaching.

Throughout 2,000 years, the Catholic Church has taught consistently that abortion is a crime against our own humanity as well as a grave moral disorder.

Ref: [url="http://www.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt3sect2chpt2art5.htm#2270"]http://www.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt3sec...t2art5.htm#2270[/url]



There was no personal attack, I simply made an observation.


God Bless,
ironmonk

[phatcatholic]

the question has been aswered, Good Friday knows where to post questions, this thread is done